By
Ota Ogie
Ph.D Student.
Department of Language and Communication Studies.
NTNU
E-mail:ota.ogie@hf.ntnu.no
Multi-verb constructions provide useful insight into the question of how languages distinguish between adjunction and complementation. The term multi-verb constructions is defined as consisting of verbs in series that can function as independent verbs in simple sentences, with at least one shared argument and no marking of syntactic dependency (cf. Amaka 2005:2).
Èdó
sv-v1objIDv2su-v1tr-v1suAg-v1obAff-v2-int-v2suAff-CAUSE_RESULT
Òzó kòkó Àdésúwà mòsé
“Ozo raised Adesuwa to be beautiful”
| Àdésúwà |
| àdésúwà |
| Adesuwa.AFFDO |
| Np |
| mòsé |
| mòsé |
| be.beautifulPAST |
| Vitr |
The template above the construction has the following structure: Area 1 gives the global labels, the number of verbs in series (ie sv, sv3, sv4 ) as well as identities and information about thematic relations holding across the verb in series. In the example above sv states that the construction is of type serial verb with 2 verbs, Area 2 gives the valence information as well as information about grammatical function and thematic roles. This is exemplified by v1objIDv2su-v1tr-v1suAg_v1obAff-v2-int-v2obAff in the example above. Here the object of v1 shares reference (ID) with the subject of v2 v1objIDv2su. Also v1 is transitive and its subject has an agent thematic role and the object an Affected role v1tr-v1suAg-v1obAff while v2 is intransitive with a subject having an Affected role v2-int-v2suAff. Information about the situation type of the construction is provided by Area 3 and this is exemplified by CAUSE_RESULT in the above example. Area 3 is written in capital letters.
In examples where there is token identity between arguments of the verbs in series, I have represented thematic relations only in area 1. Area 2 then gives information about valence, arguments that do not share thematic roles and arguments that are not shared. For example, in the consequential svc in the Èdó example below, the template reads as follows:
Area 1:sv_suObID_suAg. The serial verb construction consists of two verbs in series and the verbs in series token share their arguments. The subject argument has an agent theta role.
Area 2:v1tr-v1obThincrem-v2tr-v2obAff. V1 is transitive and has an incremental theme object. V2 is also transitive with an object bearing an affected theta role.
Area 3: The situation type is a TRANSFER relation.
(see Hellan 2008 and Hellan and Dakubu 2009 and In-depth annotation of multi-verb constructions in Èdó for discussion on the labelling conventions. Also Hellan and Dakubu 2009 uses the global label ev to represent Extended Verb Complexes and the label pv for preverbs in EVCs. In addition, to the labelling conventions used by Hellan and Dakubu 2009 for SVCs and EVCs, the following global labels are introduced to account for the range of multi-verb constructions in my data. The background assumptions remains the same:
Global labels
consecutive construction - csc
covert coordination - cc
infinitival construction - ic
modifier construction - mc
negative resultative construction - nrc
overlapping construction - oc
complement/embedded clause - cec
empty subject construction - esc
The verbs in series in multi-verb constructions need not bear one/same marking for tense, aspect, mood or negation and need not share subjects. They include SVCs, consecutive constructions, covert co-ordination, overlapping constructions, V+ modifier constructions and V+ infinitival complement constructions.
Èdó
Consequential SVC
sv_suObID_suAg-v1tr-v1obThincrem-v2tr-v2obAff-TRANSFER
Òzó lé ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́ khiẹ̣̣̣̣́n
“Ozo cooked rice and sold”
| ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́ |
| ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́ |
| rice.AFFDO |
| N |
| khiẹ̣̣̣̣́n |
| khiẹ̣̣̣̣́n |
| sellIVH |
| V |
Covert co-ordination
cc_suID_suAg-v1tr-v1obAff-v2tr-v2obThincrem-CAUSE_RESULT
Òzó gbọ̣̣̣̣̀ọ̣̣̣̣́ ívìn , bòló òká
“Ozo planted cooconut and peeled corn”
| gbọ̣̣̣̣̀ọ̣̣̣̣́ |
| gbọ̣̣̣̣̀ọ̣̣̣̣́ |
| plantPASTH |
| Vtr |
| ívìn |
| ívìn |
| coconut.AFFDO |
| CN |
V+modifier constuctions
mc-vintr_suAg-ACHVMNT-MOTION_DIRECTED
Òzó rhùlé ̣rè làọ̣̣̣̣́ òwá
“Ozo ran into the house”
| rhùlẹ̣̣̣̣́rè |
| rhùlẹ̣̣̣̣́ | rè |
| run | IVRT |
| Vitr |
| làọ̣̣̣̣́ |
| làọ̣̣̣̣́ |
| enter.V>P |
| PREP |
V+infinitival complement construction
ic_suID_suAg-v2tr-v2obThincrem-CAUSE_RESULT
Íràn kùgbé-rè tòbíràn rrí ízẹ̣̣̣̣̀
“They ate the rice together by themselves”
| Íràn |
| íràn |
| They3PLNOMSBJAGT |
| Np |
| kùgbérè |
| kùgbé-rè |
| jointogetherPASTRT |
| Vtr |
| tòbíràn |
| tòbíràn |
| by.themselves3PLREFLACC |
| |
| ízẹ̣̣̣̣̀ |
| ízẹ̣̣̣̣̀ |
| riceDOTH |
| CN |
Ewe
Consecutive constructions
cs3-v1intr-v1suAg-v2intr-v3intr-v3suAg-DIRECTED_MOTION
Mí-nɔ yi-yi-m má-vá
“You be going (and) I will come (i.e.follow)”
Overlapping constructions
oc-v1obIDv2su-v1tr-v1suAg-v1obAff-v2intr-v2suAff- CAUSE_RESULT
Kofí fo-e wò-dze anyí
“Kofi struck him/her, S/he fall down”
This study examines multi-verb constructions in (a Benue-Congo language) with the aim of identifying and classifying them and their argument sharing patterns.
We draw main background assumptions from the following sources; implemented Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammars for Norwegian (Hellan 2003) and Ga (Hellan 2007) a Kwa language spoken in Ghana; an HPSG account of argument realization patterns (Beermann, Hellan and Sætherø 2003); and a theory of event structure template (Pustejovsky 1995, 2006).
Èdó is spoken in Èdó state in Mid-Western Nigeria and belongs to the Edoid language group (Elugbe1979). It is a head initial SVO language with an open syllable system with no consonant clusters.
With respect to verbal morphology, verbs can be inflected for the purpose of pluralizing nouns they occur with and to mark iteration.
Simple sentence: V+plural suffix
v-tr-suNom_ag_obThincrem-COMPLETED_MONODEVMT
Ọ̣̣̣̣̀ gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀n-nẹ̣̣̣̣́ èbé
“He/she wrote books”
| Ọ̣̣̣̣̀ |
| ọ̣̣̣̣̀ |
| 3SGSBJNOMAGT |
| PN |
| gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀nnẹ̣̣̣̣́ |
| gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀n | nẹ̣̣̣̣́ |
| write | PLIVH |
| V |
Tense and transitivity are marked on the verb either through tonal changes or by affixation of a past tense suffix –rV under appropriate licensing conditions. With plural verbs,the order is the plural suffix before the past suffix.
Simple sentence: Present tense
v-intrImplobj-suNom_ag-NONCOMPLETED_MONODEVMT
Ọ̣̣̣̣̀ gbẹ̣̣̣̣́n
“He/she is writing”
| Ọ̣̣̣̣̀ |
| ọ̣̣̣̣̀ |
| 3SGSBJNOMAGT |
| PN |
| gbẹ̣̣̣̣́n |
| gbẹ̣̣̣̣́n |
| writePRESH |
| Vtr |
Simple sentence: Past tense
v-intrImplobj-suNom_ag-COMPLETED_MONODEVMT
Ọ̣̣̣̣̀ gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀n-nẹ̣̣̣̣́-rè
“He/she wrote several times”
| Ọ̣̣̣̣̀ |
| ọ̣̣̣̣̀ |
| 3SGNOMSBJAGT |
| PN |
| gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀nnẹ̣̣̣̣́rè |
| gbẹ̣̣̣̣̀n | nẹ̣̣̣̣́ | ̣̣̣̣̣rè |
| write | PL | IVRT |
| Vtr |
11 multi-verb constructions in Èdó are shown to pattern into four structural types with respect to the distribution of the past tense suffix –rV, an infinitival marker yá, a floating anaphor tòbórè 'by him/her/it self ', VP adverbs and argument sharing patterns:
1. V+ modifier constructions: durational, directional, locational, manner constructions:
-rV licensed, infinitival yá not licensed. One verb in the series is reanalyzed as adverb.
2. V (P) +V (P) constructions: resultatives, negative resultatives, consequential and covert
co-ordination constructions: -rV not licensed, infinitival yá not licensed. The verbs in
series have the same values for Tense, Aspect and Mood (TAM).
3. V + mood constructions: purpose constructions: -rV licensed, infinitival yá not licensed.
V2 has a positive value for MOOD.
4. V+ infinitival complement constructions: comitative and instrumental constructions:
-rV licensed, infinitival yá licensed and V2 is non-finite.
The –rV suffix also interacts in an interesting way with the temporal structures of multi-verb constructions. Overlapping events license –rV while non-overlapping events do not
The study also examines multi-verb constructions in the following languages of the Niger-Congo: Igbo and Yoruba (Benue-Congo), Gurenne (Oti-Volta), Ga, Baule, Akan and Ewe (Kwa) and situate
properties of Èdó multi-verb constructions within typology common to these languages.
ÈDÓ
ic_suID_suAg-v2tr-v2obThincrem-CAUSE_RESULT
Íràn kùgbé-rè kó!kó ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́
“They joined together and gathered the rice”
| kùgbérè |
| kùgbé | rè |
| join | IVRT |
| Vtr |
| ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́ |
| ìzẹ̣̣̣̣̣́ |
| riceDOTH |
| N |
sv_suObID_suAg_obThincrem-CAUSE_RESULT
Òzó lé ìzẹ́ ré
“Ozo cooked rice and ate”
IGBO
sv_suID_suAg-v1tr-v1obTh-v2intr-DIRECTED_MOTION
Ó wè-re ìte byá
“S/he came with a pot”
AKAN
sv-Implobj_suObID_suAg_ob_AFF-v1tr-v2tr-CAUSE_RESULT
Ama noa di
“Ama cooks and then eats”
YORUBA
sv_suID_suAg-v1tr-v1obTh-v2intr-DIRECTED_MOTION
Ó mú ìwé wá
“He brought the book”
EWE
cec-v1intr-v1suAg-v2tr-v2suAff-v2obThincrem-CAUSE_RESULT
Kofí ná (bé) wò-ɖu nú-á
“Kofi made him/her eat the thing”
BAULE
esc_suID_suAg-v1tr-v1obThincrem-v2tr-v2obAff-CAUSE_RESULT
ɔsi-li aliɛ-`n sɔkɔ-li tro`n
“S/he pounded the futu and prepared the sause”
| aliɛ`n |
| aliɛ | `n |
| foodDOTH | DEF |
| CN |
| sɔkɔli |
| sɔkɔ | li |
| prepare | COMPL |
| V |
| tro`n |
| tro`n |
| sause.AFFDEFDO |
| CN |
GURENNE
sv-suObID_suAg_obTh-v1tr-v2tr- PLACEMENT
Bà diki mà tá`asi zí'à ná
“They sent me to that place”
Ga
ev_ditr_suObID_suAg_obTh-pv1tr-vditr-iobEndpossessor-TRANSFER
E kɛ wolo lɛ ha mi
“He gave me the book”
Multi-verbs identified include SVCs in all the languages discussed, consecutive constructions and overlapping constructions in Ewe and covert co-ordination in Èdó, Igbo and Baule. Typological features used for identification include:
tense, mood, aspect, negation, adverb distribution, predicate cleft and argument sharing patterns. The findings show that the typological features of a language determine the type of multi-verb construction it licenses. Also while, inflection may demarcate multi-verb types within a language, the pattern observed for a language may not map onto another language.
With respect to argument sharing, the following types are discussed; token sharing of subjects; switch sharing; overt reference sharing of subjects; covert reference sharing of subjects; token sharing of objects ; overt reference sharing of objects and covert sharing of objects.
The patterns found in the languages studied support the claim that languages with rich verbal agreement features allow recoverability of unexpressed arguments and tend to license null subjects and objects.
Object sharing patterns show asymmetry with respect to switch sharing and reference sharing. Languages that have overt reference subject sharing patterns do not have switch sharing (Ewe, Ga and Baule) while those that do not, tend to employ token/covert reference sharing of subjects and switch sharing (Èdó, Yoruba and Akan).This is buttressed by data from Attie and Likpe closely related languages to these languages. With respect to object sharing, these languages that do not have switch sharing all have covert sharing of objects, while those that have, do not have covert sharing of objects. Èdó belongs to the type that does not have overt reference sharing of subjects and tend to employ token sharing of subjects and switch sharing. For object sharing, Èdó does not have covert sharing of objects and employs mainly token sharing of objects.In particular, object sharing in multi-verb constructions in Èdó is analyzed as token sharing by grammatical function.
Two schemas are posited to account for Èdó multi-verb constructions:
1.Verb-serial-compl (ement)-phrase with a complementation structure for the
V (P) +V (P) resultative and V+infinitival complement constructions.
2.Serial-mod-phrase with an adjunction structure for V+mood constructions, V+modifier
constructions and V (P) +V (P); consequential, purpose, and negative resultative
constructions.